IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Vazifdar S.J., J.
Pidilite Industries Ltd..... Plaintiff.
Versus
S.M. Associates others.... Defendants.
Notice of Motion No. 2830 of 2001 in Suit No. 3919 of 2001, decided on 25-7-2002/10-2-2003.
Advocates appeared :
Dr. Virendra Tulzapurkar with Virag Tulzapurkar Ravi Kadam i/b., H.W. Kane, for plaintiff.
Dr. Avinash Shivade i/b., V.R. Giri, for defendant Nos. 1 to 3.
Subodh Joshi i/b., Lokandwala Co., for defendant No. 4.
Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Section 77 - Trademark - Infringement of - Two marks after seeking as whole creating confusion or deception due to similarity between two - Defendant adopted essential features of plaintiff s trademark - Case of infringement of plaintiff s trademark clearly made out - Must succeed. - Court is of the view that the plaintiff s case of infringement of its trademark is well founded and must succeed.
VAZIFDAR S.J., J.:---The plaintiff has filed this suit to restrain the first defendant from infringing its copyright in its artistic work and its registered trade mark "M-Seal" and for passing off.
2.From 1968 Mahindra Van Wijk and Visser Ltd. commenced use of the trade mark M-Seal in respect of its goods.
On 21st September, 1970, one K.E. Motiwala, a partner of defendant No. 1 was employed as an Engineer by Mahendra Van Wijk and Visser Limited, which was later named as Mahindra Electrochemical Products Ltd. (M.E.P.L.).
M.E.P.L. applied for and obtained with effect from 16-8-1972 registration of the trade mark "M-Seal" (lable mark) under Registration Nos. 282, 168 in Class I in respect of epoxy resin compositions included in Class I used for cementing cracks, holes, leaks and similar defects in metal articles and for other technical purposes. The certificate stated that the registration shall give no right to the exclusive use of the word "Seal". The mark was also stated to be associated with No. 282, 169. The registration of the said mark is valid and subsisting having been renewed upto 16th August, 2007.
M.E.P.L. merged with Indian National Diesel Engine Co. Ltd. pursuant to an order passed by this Court on 20th April, 1978. The name Indian National Diesel Engineering Co. Ltd. was changed to Mahendra Engineering and Chemical Products Limited (M.E.C.P.L.)
On 18th December, 1980, K.E. Motiwala resigned from and on 11th November, 1982 he rejoined M.E.C.P.L.
From 1987, the plaintiff started using continuously and extensively cartons in respect of the goods, the artistic work whereupon was created by an artist in the employment of Everest Advertising Pvt. Ltd. engaged by M.E.C.P.L.
The plaintiff claims to be the assignee of the trade mark and the copyright of the artistic work. I shall refer to the same later.
In 1988 K.E. Motiwala was appointed as a Director on the Board of Kliptronic Components Pvt. Ltd. On 19th January, 1990 K.E. Motiwala resigned from M.E.C.P.L. on 30th January, 1990 his resignation was accepted by M.E.C.P.L. Thus, for a short duration he was an employee of M.E.C.P.L. as well as a Director of Kliptronic Components Pvt. Ltd.
3.The association of Motiwala with the plaintiffs predecessors was thus substantial, indicating his knowledge of and familiarity with the said trade mark and copyright.
4.On 1st September, 1992, a partnership firm Electro Components Manufacturing Co., was formed of which K.E. Motiwala was a partner. He resigned as a partner in October, 1995.
5.In 1994 M.E.C.P.L. filed Suit No. 4 of 1994 against Kliptronic Components Pvt. Ltd. in respect of the use of the trade mark "Klip-Seal". Motiwala was impleaded there as defendant No. 3. By an order dated 16th July, 1994, the District Judge, Pune dismissed M.E.C.P.L.s application for interim reliefs. I will deal with these proceedings subsequently as they have been referred to on behalf of the first defendant to oppose the present Notice of Motion.
6.On 1st April, 1998, defendant No. 1 was formed. It manufactures and sells the said goods. Defendant No. 2 is the distributor of the goods of defendant No. 1. Defendant Nos. 3 and 4 are dealers and agents inter alia of the said goods manufactured and sold by defendant No. 1.
7.By deeds of assignment of copyright and of trade mark both dated 27th March, 2000, M.E.C.P.L. assigned and transferred to the plaintiff its said copyright and trade mark together with the good-will of the business. On 27th March, 2000 the plaintiff also made a request in Form T to the Registrar of Trade Mark to enter its name as the subsequent proprietor of the registered trade mark. The request is pending.
8.According to the plaintiff in October, 2001, it learnt that the defendants were manufacturing and selling the said goods which were inferior in quality to those of the plaintiff.
In the circumstances, the plaintiff filed the present suit on 5th November, 2001.
9.I will first deal with the plaintiffs case regarding infringement of copyri
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.